City Settles Costly Lawsuits

$1.3 Million Tab Resolves 2 Cases

A rash of controversial rulings against the Chicago Police Department has made its officers reluctant to chase down criminals for fear that they could be sued and ultimately lose their jobs, several aldermen charged Wednesday.

They made the allegations as the City Council approved two settlements against the police department--including the highly publicized case involving Jorge Guillen--even though the officers involved in both incidents were cleared of any wrongdoing.

Several aldermen who voted against the settlements, which will cost taxpayers $1.3 million, argued that they would hurt police morale and encourage others to file suit against the department.

"Each and every time someone is injured during an arrest, we're going to have attorneys running to the courthouse to sue the city of Chicago," said Ald. Thomas Murphy (18th).

Ald. Brian Doherty (41st) said the city should fight the lawsuits in court "so everyone can be assured that justice is being served."

"It might be financially prudent (to settle), but that doesn't make it the right thing to do," he said. "There's a feeling out there (among police officers) that if I go out there and do my job, go after the gangbangers and the bad guys, that I could be putting the welfare of my family at risk . . . that I could lose my job, lose my mortgage."

But other aldermen--and Mayor Richard Daley--countered that the city should settle the cases because they could end up costing more if they went before a jury.

"This jury might look at this family who've been deprived of their husband and father and say, `Let's give them $2 million. Let's give them $5 million.' Who knows?" said Ald. Edward Burke (14th), referring to the Guillen case.

Daley said the settlements were a business decision necessitated by a "litigating society."

"You fall over a curb, and there's 10,000 lawyers after you on LaSalle Street," Daley said. "That is the judgment of the lawyer handling the case. They make a recommendation, and I follow it."

The Guillen case dates to Oct. 3, 1995, when officers were summoned to a Humboldt Park apartment by Guillen's daughter, who said her father was threatening to kill his family.

Guillen, a 45-year-old Honduran immigrant with a history of mental illness, swung at officers with a board when they arrived on the scene. He was wrestled to the ground by the officers and asphyxiated as they held him down.

Guillen's death served as a lightning rod for the Hispanic community. Many Hispanics contended that Guillen's death was indicative of rampant police brutality against minorities. But the Police Board, two Cook County state's attorneys and the U.S. Justice Department examined the case and cleared the officers of wrongdoing.

The second case involved a March 31, 1989, drug raid on a South Side townhouse in which police ended up shooting and wounding Andrew Sledd Jr., who was then 25.

Police argued that they shot Sledd because he shot at them first with a .22-caliber rifle. But Sledd, who was exonerated of criminal charges, claimed that he did not fire the gun he grabbed because he believed the police were intruders.

On Wednesday afternoon, Sledd, who suffered permanent nerve damage, insisted the city only settles a handful of cases that have merit, and he argued that victims of wrongful arrest should be compensated for police blunders.

"Police have to understand that it's not a free-for-all out there," said Sledd, who added that he was a college student with no criminal record at the time. "Just because they have a gun and a badge, they can't do anything they want."

The Guillen and Sledd settlements came about a month after the Chicago Police Board voted to fire two officers for the Sept. 26 beating of a West Side man, Jeremiah Mearday. It was a ruling that outraged many Chicago police officers who believe the firings were politically motivated.

In other business, the City Council also approved an ordinance to give the city's administrative hearing officers more muscle when deciding disputes over such offenses as parking tickets and graffiti. Under the ordinance, rulings by the city's 84 administrative hearing officers will have the weight of a court order. That means the city will have an easier time placing liens or garnisheeing wages from scofflaws.